Cargando…

Extending Causality Tests with Genetic Instruments: An Integration of Mendelian Randomization with the Classical Twin Design

Although experimental studies are regarded as the method of choice for determining causal influences, these are not always practical or ethical to answer vital questions in health and social research (e.g., one cannot assign individuals to a “childhood trauma condition” in studying the causal effect...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Minică, Camelia C., Dolan, Conor V., Boomsma, Dorret I., de Geus, Eco, Neale, Michael C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6028857/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29882082
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10519-018-9904-4
_version_ 1783336854875013120
author Minică, Camelia C.
Dolan, Conor V.
Boomsma, Dorret I.
de Geus, Eco
Neale, Michael C.
author_facet Minică, Camelia C.
Dolan, Conor V.
Boomsma, Dorret I.
de Geus, Eco
Neale, Michael C.
author_sort Minică, Camelia C.
collection PubMed
description Although experimental studies are regarded as the method of choice for determining causal influences, these are not always practical or ethical to answer vital questions in health and social research (e.g., one cannot assign individuals to a “childhood trauma condition” in studying the causal effects of childhood trauma on depression). Key to solving such questions are observational studies. Mendelian Randomization (MR) is an influential method to establish causality in observational studies. MR uses genetic variants to test causal relationships between exposures/risk factors and outcomes such as physical or mental health. Yet, individual genetic variants have small effects, and so, when used as instrumental variables, render MR liable to weak instrument bias. Polygenic scores have the advantage of larger effects, but may be characterized by horizontal pleiotropy, which violates a central assumption of MR. We developed the MR-DoC twin model by integrating MR with the Direction of Causation twin model. This model allows us to test pleiotropy directly. We considered the issue of parameter identification, and given identification, we conducted extensive power calculations. MR-DoC allows one to test causal hypotheses and to obtain unbiased estimates of the causal effect given pleiotropic instruments, while controlling for genetic and environmental influences common to the outcome and exposure. Furthermore, the approach allows one to employ strong instrumental variables in the form of polygenic scores, guarding against weak instrument bias, and increasing the power to detect causal effects of exposures on potential outcomes. Beside allowing to test pleiotropy directly, incorporating in MR data collected from relatives provide additional within-family data that resolve additional assumptions like random mating, the absence of the gene-environment interaction/covariance, no dyadic effects. Our approach will enhance and extend MR’s range of applications, and increase the value of the large cohorts collected at twin/family registries as they correctly detect causation and estimate effect sizes even in the presence of pleiotropy. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10519-018-9904-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6028857
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60288572018-07-23 Extending Causality Tests with Genetic Instruments: An Integration of Mendelian Randomization with the Classical Twin Design Minică, Camelia C. Dolan, Conor V. Boomsma, Dorret I. de Geus, Eco Neale, Michael C. Behav Genet Original Research Although experimental studies are regarded as the method of choice for determining causal influences, these are not always practical or ethical to answer vital questions in health and social research (e.g., one cannot assign individuals to a “childhood trauma condition” in studying the causal effects of childhood trauma on depression). Key to solving such questions are observational studies. Mendelian Randomization (MR) is an influential method to establish causality in observational studies. MR uses genetic variants to test causal relationships between exposures/risk factors and outcomes such as physical or mental health. Yet, individual genetic variants have small effects, and so, when used as instrumental variables, render MR liable to weak instrument bias. Polygenic scores have the advantage of larger effects, but may be characterized by horizontal pleiotropy, which violates a central assumption of MR. We developed the MR-DoC twin model by integrating MR with the Direction of Causation twin model. This model allows us to test pleiotropy directly. We considered the issue of parameter identification, and given identification, we conducted extensive power calculations. MR-DoC allows one to test causal hypotheses and to obtain unbiased estimates of the causal effect given pleiotropic instruments, while controlling for genetic and environmental influences common to the outcome and exposure. Furthermore, the approach allows one to employ strong instrumental variables in the form of polygenic scores, guarding against weak instrument bias, and increasing the power to detect causal effects of exposures on potential outcomes. Beside allowing to test pleiotropy directly, incorporating in MR data collected from relatives provide additional within-family data that resolve additional assumptions like random mating, the absence of the gene-environment interaction/covariance, no dyadic effects. Our approach will enhance and extend MR’s range of applications, and increase the value of the large cohorts collected at twin/family registries as they correctly detect causation and estimate effect sizes even in the presence of pleiotropy. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10519-018-9904-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2018-06-07 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6028857/ /pubmed/29882082 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10519-018-9904-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Research
Minică, Camelia C.
Dolan, Conor V.
Boomsma, Dorret I.
de Geus, Eco
Neale, Michael C.
Extending Causality Tests with Genetic Instruments: An Integration of Mendelian Randomization with the Classical Twin Design
title Extending Causality Tests with Genetic Instruments: An Integration of Mendelian Randomization with the Classical Twin Design
title_full Extending Causality Tests with Genetic Instruments: An Integration of Mendelian Randomization with the Classical Twin Design
title_fullStr Extending Causality Tests with Genetic Instruments: An Integration of Mendelian Randomization with the Classical Twin Design
title_full_unstemmed Extending Causality Tests with Genetic Instruments: An Integration of Mendelian Randomization with the Classical Twin Design
title_short Extending Causality Tests with Genetic Instruments: An Integration of Mendelian Randomization with the Classical Twin Design
title_sort extending causality tests with genetic instruments: an integration of mendelian randomization with the classical twin design
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6028857/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29882082
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10519-018-9904-4
work_keys_str_mv AT minicacameliac extendingcausalitytestswithgeneticinstrumentsanintegrationofmendelianrandomizationwiththeclassicaltwindesign
AT dolanconorv extendingcausalitytestswithgeneticinstrumentsanintegrationofmendelianrandomizationwiththeclassicaltwindesign
AT boomsmadorreti extendingcausalitytestswithgeneticinstrumentsanintegrationofmendelianrandomizationwiththeclassicaltwindesign
AT degeuseco extendingcausalitytestswithgeneticinstrumentsanintegrationofmendelianrandomizationwiththeclassicaltwindesign
AT nealemichaelc extendingcausalitytestswithgeneticinstrumentsanintegrationofmendelianrandomizationwiththeclassicaltwindesign